[Aayushyaash]

Summary

In an executable .py file, when an abstract class or sub-protocol overrides a constructor-like method (__init__, __new__, or __init_subclass__) to declare or refine a signature with a placeholder body (..., pass, or raise NotImplementedError), Pyrefly reported a false-positive missing-super-call error.

While #5180 skipped .pyi stubs and if TYPE_CHECKING: blocks, overriding methods in runtime .py files were still required to call super(), even when the overriding method itself was an abstract or protocol declaration without a runtime implementation.

This PR updates check_missing_super_call_for_field() to skip the check when the overriding method is abstract or belongs to a Protocol and its body kind is BodyKind::Ellipsis, BodyKind::Trivial, or BodyKind::RaiseNotImplementedError.

Fixes #5431

• I am a human, and I fully understand the code I am submitting.

Test Plan

Added regression tests in pyrefly/lib/test/class_overrides.rs covering:

• An abstract child class overriding __init__ with ....
• An abstract child class overriding __init__ with pass.
• An abstract child class overriding __init__ with raise NotImplementedError.
• A sub-protocol overriding a parent protocol's __init__ with ....

Validation:

cargo test -p pyrefly --lib test_missing_super_call
cargo test -p pyrefly --lib test::class_overrides::
python3 test.py --lint --no-test --no-conformance --no-jsonschema --no-extension

[meta-codesync]

This pull request has been imported. If you are a Meta employee, you can view this in D128855918. (Because this pull request was imported automatically, there will not be any future comments.)

[github-actions]

According to mypy_primer, this change doesn't affect type check results on a corpus of open source code. ✅